You don't hear much about 'em.
They've managed to sustain an independent existence throughout, so what will become of them through this new, democratic Iraq (if that becomes the case)? How will they feature, how will they be included?
And what about the notion of creating a seperate state for Kurds? Kuridstan? There would hardly be the Israeli situation if that was to happen, as the region is dominantly Kurdish anyway (Northern Iraq), Sunni Muslims. It's also been pro-coalition throughout the conflict, and before.
But I have heard that Kurdish territory overlaps in to both Turkey, Iran and Syria.

I'm only asking as this was brought up a while back on some News forum (just before the war), and I remember someone saying that Kurdish leaders still wanted to remain a part of Iraq, but with a large amount of autonomy. Like.. Scotland, within Great Britain.
Personally? I would actually like to see some form of autonomy given to the Kurdish people. Being the "inferior", in terms of power and size, Sunni Iraqi's, they've always been oppressed or ignored, from the Sassanian Empire, by the Ottomans, the British implemented Monarch, and by later day rulers like Saddam.
Whatchya reckon?

Freedom for the Kurds!

The establishment of a Kurdish state means a civil war encompassing most of Turkey - anything Saddam ever did would pale in comparison.

"Relative autonomy" for the Kurdish part of Iraq is only possible as long as international forces are stationed in the country. Objectively, the best they could hope for is having several US/Brit/whatever military bases (much like Germany or Japan) in their region for protection after Iraq becomes self-governed.

Turkey is strongly opposed to an independent Kurd state. They have been loudly objecting to the idea every time it came up before.

I'm not a self proclaimed expert on international politics like a few people who frequent this board so I can only speculate on the reason but I think they are afraid of having to deal with the human rights of Kurds inside Turkish territory if such a state emerged and as such it could express political/military pressure on them.

Let them decide.

I hope they stay and keep the rest of the Shias and Sunnis on a leash in a moderate government. Will be nice to have a few less anti-western viewpoints in the Iraqi government.

I hope they stay and keep the rest of the Shias and Sunnis on a leash in a moderate government.

Do you really not have a clue that other countries arent like we are? You really think we can put a non religious based government in power before July?

If they dont should we invade them in case they have a weapon that might hurt us?

akipt, are you really that dense? The notion of an Iraqi government there that would do more than pay lip service to democracy existing within the next couple of decades is completely absurd.

Assuming a general election takes place, any legitimate government will be a predominantly religious Shi'ite one. If the coalition lets it function, the Sunnis and Kurds will be horribly repressed; if it intervenes on said minorities' behalves, it will be undermining the government's authority and will probably trigger lots of unrest at best and possibly an uprising.

Another possibility is a generic dictatorship, as before but considerably worse. For all of Saddam's failings, he did bring about decent infrastructure and an excellent (by the region's standards, anyway) education system. A new dictatorship kind of defeats the point of going after Saddam in the first place.

The likely outcome is a 'democracy' headed by some fellow with a Western hand up his ass. Without repressive measures on a large scale, he'll get overthrown and we'll have another Iran. With said measures there will be bloodbaths aplenty and we're gonna have to unsaddle that already nonexistent high horse of ours for years to come.

Democracy cannot be successfully imposed on a region - the people must desire and create it for themselves.

What do they say about having the bigotry of lower expectations?

Yeah, they must be genetically lacking huh?

What do they say about having the bigotry of lower expectations?

Yeah, they must be genetically lacking huh?

Says the man who wants to impose his principles on them by force?

Says the man who wants to impose his principles on them by force?

Let them decide.LMAO. Dumbass.

I pretty much inferred from prior posts but missed that; reading comprehension is usually my friend :(

Nevertheless, I don't see what genetics have to do with it. Iraq has an entirely different set of circumstances: lower quality of life, not nearly as much of a middle class as in your average democracy, and vastly different social conditioning on many levels. There's nothing intrinsically inferior about Iraqis. But after decades of living under a secular dictatorship, most people would probably feel differently about their preferred form of government from, well, any given poster on these boards.

Willgatus, don't bother.
Akipt sits in his Western chair, applies his Western values to other cultures, and judges through Western perspectives.
He cannot understand, or doesn't want to, the motives of other regions, and how they differ.

Invade, occupy, slaughter the infidels, put a Western puppet government up, leave.

That's what is going to make the world safer.
Now Saddam can't fire a 155mm shell at America and wipe out a bunch of people.
We're safe.

The world is safe now. WEST FOREVER! CHRISTIANITY ROCKS!
KILL THE ARAB INFIDELS! SHOW THEM OUR WAY IS THE ONLY WAY!

La la la.